Short question: is the balance of the factions from vCOH and OF the same as it is in 2.602, essentially making this mod relic Coh + a soviet faction or have all factions been tweaked? If it isn't, but was, up to what version was it still? Thanks in advance!

I think that the leveling rate for drakes needs to be tweaked. It feels quite off. They go from lvl 1-4, by just killing one battalion of Gondor Soldiers. I realize that, if it's too hard, they won't be fun to play with. But as it stands now, it's somewhat absurd...

While, I was playing Rohan yesterday, I noticed a peculiarity.
Namely, Ghan-Buri-Ghan's leadership radius is smaller than the range of his archers. Therefore, you have to choose between giving them leadership or using him in combat. I think it would only be logical to give his leadership a radius that is as large, if not a little larger than the range of his archers.

P.S. The translation is coming along nicely. However, I wasn't able to work on it this week, as I'm taking some exams. From Thursday onward, I'll resume my work.

I had some spare time today, so I decided to test out version 3.7.1. It's a great version and a definite improvement over version 3.7. Congradulations to the modders! :)
However, if I had some complaints, I'd have to say that the Dwarven cave entrances still feel quite buggy and Mollok shouldn't die with 1/3 health left...

Some of these features are already featured in the mod. For example, Eowyn deals +100% damage versus Ring Wraiths. I'm not sure about the other ones, as I haven't played thoroughly in a while, but I'm sure the developers thought of them. If they haven't been implement, there must have been a logical or balance related issue...

Well, you can't compare company of heroe's and dawn of war's upkeep system with the one I'm proposing for edain. Both games are completely different. I only mentioned COH and DOW to support my claim about the importance of an upkeep system.I'm sure other solutions exist, but the core game mechanics are in need of some dire changes.

Most of my friends that played BFME, always saw it as merely a fun game to play every now and then, as they felt it lacked the refinement needed for the game to be truly captivating. As much as I enjoy Edain, I would have to agree. With the current way the economic system and units are balanced, it's hard to see it as a competitive game. The fact that tournament games are played with random factions says enough...
I don't mean to sound harsh, but I believe in doing so, perhaps the desire to take initiative will be evoked among the team members. I realize that beta testers will help flatten out some of the kinks in the unit balance system, however the core game mechanics are fundamentally flawed and in the long run, only a drastic overhaul will improve the overall experience. I've heard from multiple team members that there will be some fundamental gameplay changes, but I'm hard-pressed to believe that they will be adequet. I hope I'm wrong...

Yes, I read what you said, thus I indirectly quoted you...
And if you read what I said, you would have known, that I have never coded for BFME. :P
I realize that it could be difficult, but aren't the best things in life hard to come by? ^^
Well, anyway, I'm just suggesting a possible manifestation of my concept. An upkeep system is up to interpretation, but I stand by what I said earlier, namely, that I think it would refine Edain's gameplay. I always felt that the main attraction of the bfme games was the epic scope and scale and not really the overly refined gameplay. I believe this might be a step forward for the whole core gameplay system. Whether it's too much work or not, is up to the team members to decide.
However, I personally think that a release version with just such a core gameplay change would be more exciting than some faction tweaks. Hopefully more edainians share my view.
If so, perhaps the hard work would be well worth it. :D

Well, there is a clear line between realistic and gameplay logical. I meant that, for an rts, it makes sense, from a gameplay pov, to have an upkeep system. It keeps resource gathering and unit spendings balanced, hence it's featured in most rtses. Perhaps, I was exaggerating about sitting back and preparing for a large battle, but in all honesty, it's hard not to be floating in cash late game. This is much more a consequence of the resourcing gathering system, than the shortcomings of the player.
In addition, based on what you said about coding it in the library, it really shouldn't be that hard to implement. Obviously, fine tuning would be hard, but I truly think there's a lot of potential in this concept.

And with all due respect, it really wouldn't affect the ambience set by the LOTR theme. If anything it would enhance it, as super units would be far harder to get to, making their battlefield presence far rarer and menacing. All in all, battle scenes would far more movie like, as the balance between light, medium and heavy units would be far more coherent.

@Gnomi
What's not to like about upkeep costs for units? For one, it's rather logical and realistic that an army costs maintenance.
More importantly, however, it opens up all sorts of new strategic possibilities. Total war will be far more important, namely farm bashing will really help gain an early and late game superiority, as the lvled farms will be essential for sustain a competitive late game army.

I know that edain is balanced for 1vs1, in which case cash flow and late game resources aren't very important, as most well played games won't last that long. However, for all the fun 2vs2 or 3ffa games, upkeep costs will make the gameplay far more interesting and balanced. The biggest balance problem with 3ffa or larger games was that a player could generally sit back, tech like mad, and then storm in with an invincible and frankly pathetic army. An upkeep system would eliminate such scenarios, as such a player would be forced to expand into enemy territories, in order to sustain such an army. Thus, being forced upon mid game skirmishes.
Furthermore, it'll also force you to expand your settlement. In the current version, it's no rarity to see only 50% of a large map populated by buildings... -.-' That's quite a shame and very annoying, as it provokes bunkering. With this system, battlefronts would be determined by the borders of your settlements and not by some convenient spot you chose, which is far more realistic.

The best advantage, I can think of, however, is that it would provide as a breath of fresh air to a game that has been ageing for the over 5 years now.
I really don't see any counter arguement and consequently most games feature such a system, Dawn of War II and Company of heroes to name a few...

I might be over enthusiastic about this, but I really think it's a most intriguing solution. Please reconsider...^^

However, I think an even more interesting solution would be an upkeep system similar to civ3-5, where each unit has a dedicated upkeep cost, as this would truely increase the incentive for expanding, while rendering bunkering completely useless. To reduce the stress this would provoke on balancing, there could be 3 classes for all units and heroes, early game, mid game and late game. EG heroes and units should have no upkeep or perhaps up to 2, in order to keep the eg unchanged. In addition, eg units are already limited by their cp cost, so upkeep is somewhat unnecessary that early in the game. MG units and heroes should cost 10-15, fine tuning is up to beta testing. LG heroes and units should cost around 25-30. I also think that any additional fortress you control should cost 60-75 upkeep, while towers should cost 10 each. Perhaps you can even make it so that towers and fortresses are abandonable, if you decide that you can't afford them, rendering them garrisonable by whomsoever wishes to cap them, but that's just icing on the cake. ;) In addition, it should be allowed to have a negative income, providing for a very interesting economic twist.

I'm no coder, so I don't know if this is even remotely possible, but if it is, it would provide for a whole new strategic aspect to gameplay, making the experience far more polished, balanced and interesting. It would also alleviate many unofficial rules established by the tunngle community. Furthermore, it would provide for a whole new manner to balance units, especially super units, such as giants, which are generally seen as lame in overabundance! :)

Please let me know what you guys think? I'm very excited about this concept :P

I always wanted a unit to be able to disguise and infiltrate like the cah unit. I think Frodo and Sam provide as a feasible possibility, given that they disguised themselves as orcs, upon entering mordor.

Would it be possible to code an upkeep system for edain? I thought long and hard about a way to decrease late game cash flow and increase the incentive to expand, while also increasing the consequences of bunkering. The solution seems to a lie in the confines of an upkeep system. I came up with two possible renditions. The simple solution would be to mimic wc3's percentage system. So, for example , once you control an army of 300 cp, you only gain 70% of your net income. The cp vs cost should remain linear until 700cp where it stays at 30%. or even simpler would be 3 stages each with a dedicated percentage cost. This would increase the superiority you gain from expanding and reduce late game cash flow, while also forcing you to choose the size of their army wisely

It's true that Snow Trolls aren't mentioned in the book, but Hill Trolls are and, since they are used pretty interchangeably in the game, I thought their core designs should resemble eachother's. Nevertheless, the mini horde was just an idea and I realize it's probably a bit messy, as you always want to be able to micro your trolls. However, I still feel that their current implementation is quite dull and lacking in presence, especially when compared to Cave- and Mountain Trolls. I always thought Edain laid special emphasis on making everything feel unique, well this aspect of the game definitely doesn't showcase that emphasis...

I have a question/suggestion. I've never been fond of the implementation of snow and hills trolls in both bfme2 vanilla and edain, given that in the book they were described as having a similar silhouette to men, but being slightly larger. Bfme2's interpretation seemed too generic and uncreative, while edain's interpretation seemed incorrect and too similar to normal trolls. I would like appreciate seeing them redone. A possible rendition would be, something along the lines of, a horde of 3 quick trolls with knock back and aoe. I think that'd feel more unique in-game, while remaining harmonious with the book.